E S S A Y

.65
Future Life Forms among Posthumans

Jose' Luis Cordeiro

World Future Society
Venezuela

As we begin to ride the wave into human redesign, the destination is still largely unknown. But despite all the unanswered
questions, we have a number of clues that can help us speculate as to what we truly mean by the posthuman organism - including
the striking acknowledgement that in all likelihood not just one type of posthuman awaits us, but several.
We will re-engineer our biological constitutions, and introduce silicon, steel, and microchips into ourselves. Some may choose
to reside in computers as conscious wave patterns, while others will convert themselves into durable robots and venture out into
space. Simultaneously, we will create entirely new forms of life, including artificial intelligence and perhaps even a global con-
sciousness.
Humanity's monopoly as the only advanced sentient life form on the planet will soon come to an end, supplemented by a
number of posthuman incarnations. Moreover, how we re-engineer ourselves could fundamentally change the ways in which our
society functions, and raise crucial questions about our identities and moral status as human beings.

Popular culture is abuzz with new terminology.
Genetic engineering. Cyborgs. Artificial intelligence.
Consciousness (mind) uploading. Nanotechnology.
Singularity. Transhumanism. Posthumanism. In particu-
larly, the terms "transhuman" and "posthuman" seem to
be gaining more and more currency with each passing
year - especially in the media and academia, and among
the techno-intelligentsia.
Yet, as futurists make these grand prognostications,
do we really know what's in store for Homo sapiens? Just
how will we "improve" ourselves? What do we really
mean when we refer to the posthuman physical condi-
tion? Just what, exactly, is the grand potential for intelli-
gent life? What does advanced intelligence look like?
The world is moving fast towards a fourth wave (fol-
lowing the terminology of US futurist Alvin Toffler) in
which humans will become transhumans, and then
posthumans, thanks to the multiple and simultaneous
advances of technology. We could redesign ourselves in
any number of ways, and we have to examine radical
scenarios for the evolution of the human species. Such a
transcendental change has been described by some
experts as analogous to when apes evolved into humans.
Transhumanism
As the possibility for conscious human redesign has
emerged, so too has a philosophical movement that con-
siders the implications. This approach to future-oriented
thinking, known as transhumanism, works on the prem-
ise that the human species does not represent the end of
human evolution but, rather, its beginning (see, for
example, www.transhumanism.org). Transhumanism is
an interdisciplinary approach to understanding and eval-
uating the possibilities for overcoming biological limita-
tions through scientific progress. Ultimately, transhu-
manists hope to see technological opportunities expand-
ed for people, so that they may live longer and healthier
lives and enhance their intellectual, physical and emo-
tional capacities.
Transhumanism emphasizes that we have the
potential not just to "be" but to "become." Not only can

Journal of Futures Studies, November 2003, 8(2): 65 - 72

 Journal of Futures Studies
we use rational means to improve the human
condition and the external world; we can also
use them to improve ourselves, the human
organism. And we are not limited only to the
methods, such as education, which humanism
(its philosophical precursor) normally espouses.
Rather, transhumanists argue, we will have the
means that will eventually enable us to move
beyond what most would describe as human.
Transhumanists believe that, through the
accelerating pace of technological development
and scientific understanding, we are entering a
whole new stage in the history of the sapient
species. Advances in artificial intelligence, robot-
ics, bioengineering, cloning, cryonics, nanotech-
nology, new energies, mind uploading, dietary
restriction, "designer babies", cyborgs, molecular
chemistry, telecommunications, space explo-
ration, virtual reality, life extension and immor-
tality will lead to substantial physical and mental
augmentation, possibly converging at a "singular-
ity" point.
The historical human desire to transcend
bodily and mental limitations is deeply inter-
twined with a human fascination with new
knowledge, which might be both inspiring and
frightening. How these technologies are used
could fundamentally change the ways in which
our society functions, and raises crucial ques-
tions about our identities and moral status as
human beings.
Advancing Technologies, Advancing
Possibilities
New developments in science and technol-
ogy are occurring so fast that some might begin
to overwhelm our capacities to adapt to change.
Personal computers did not exist 30 years ago,
cell phones did not exist 20 years ago, and the
Internet (actually, the World Wide Web, www)
did not exist 10 years ago. What will come in the
next 10 years? And in the next 20 years? And
beyond that? The British-born engineer and sci-
ence fiction writer Arthur. C. Clarke claimed that:
"people tend to overestimate the short term
impact of new technologies and to underesti-
66 mate the long term impact."
In the biological sciences, similar achieve-
ments have been made since the discovery of
the DNA structure in 1953, including new medi-
cines, bioengineering and cloning technologies.
In 2002 a living creature - polio virus - was
assembled piece by piece with several bio-chem-
icals by US scientists J. Cello, A. Pauli and E.
Wimmer in the New York State University.
Cryonics and nanotechnology, for example, were
also totally unknown just a few decades ago.
Indeed, many years ago, British scientist and
writer Arthur C. Clarke said that "any sufficiently
advanced technology is undistinguishable from
magic."
The pace of change is not only very fast but
it is also accelerating. Some experts like US engi-
neer Ray Kurzweil even talk about a coming "sin-
gularity" where artificial intelligence and artificial
life forms will overtake human intelligence and
human life in the coming decades. Slow biologi-
cal evolution seems to be approaching fast a
dead end: our species will continue changing but
not through the old and slow biological evolu-
tion but through the new and fast technological
evolution.
Today many boundaries are blurring.
Boundaries between birth and death, between
virtual and real, between morality and immorali-
ty, between truth and falsity, between inner and
outer worlds, between me and "non" me,
between life and "non" life, even between natural
and "non" natural. What is life? What is death?
What is "non" life? What is natural life? What is
"non" natural life? What is artificial life?
These are all deep questions for a new
deep world of transhumanism and subsequent
posthumanism. The answers are complicated
and they might be so difficult for us to compre-
hend as many of our current problems might
seem to monkeys, or even to ants. British writer
H.G. Wells said it very well about a hundred
years ago: "all that the human mind has ever
accomplished is but the dream before the awak-
ening."
Many New Emerging Species
If we believe that biological evolution has
reached a limit, what will come next? Finnish
 Future Life Forms among Posthumans
engineer Pentti Malaska tried to answer this
question in 1997 during a speech in Brisbane,
Australia, while he was president of the World
Futures Studies Federation (WFSF). He talked
about human-made non-human generations in
In such a posthuman world beings of other
kinds, different from us (bio-orgs of Homo sapi-
ens), may well be within the bounds of human
invention. Malaska defined the other intelligent
and conscious beings as:
Bio-orgs or Homo sapiens - a protein-
coded bio-organism in the earthly infra-
structure as their "natural" surrounding.
Cyborgs - a cybernetic organism - a combi-
nation of techniques and human biology
mainly for the earthly infrastructure and
the near space.
Silorgs - a silicon organism - a humanlike
non-human, fashioned by coding artificial
DNA onto silicon compounds with ammo-
nium as a solvent and aimed basically for
outer space infrastructure.
Symborgs - a symbolic organism - self-
reflective, self-reproducing, self-conscious,
"living programs" within the Internet as
their "natural" infrastructure with
advanced interface functions with the
other species.
According to Malaska, Cyborgs of
Cyborgkind, Silorgs of Silorgkind, and Symborgs
of Symborgkind are "gestating, waiting to be
brought to life." Finally, there is the Grand
Pa'&Ma' Internet - a global mind with superior
intelligence and wisdom. This Grand Pa'&Ma'
Internet could be a Quantum Global Brain.
Australian economist Paul Wildman, also an
the pipeline of evolution. Malaska described two
major kinds of species (carbon-based humies
and silicon/information-based high techies, as a
rough simplification) and four minor kinds of
global persona sapiens, as can be seen below:
active member of the WFSF, further talks about
terrestrial and non terrestrial Forms Of Life (FOL).
Wildman uses the concept "borg" in its historical
and generic sense to identify a "Bionic" (i.e.
human made) "ORGanism", and defines five such
terrestrial FOL borgs:
Orgoborgs - organic FOL, including "tradi-
tional" Humborgs (like Homo sapiens) and
new and hybrid bioengineered Bioborgs.
GEborgs - Genetically Engineered FOL.
Cyborgs - human/machine composite FOL.
Symborgs - symbolical and symbological
FOL, including Conscious/External (such
as cultures and corporations) and
Unconscious/Internal (such as myths and
archetypes) FOL.
Technoborgs - technological FOL, includ-
ing Exoskeletalborgs (with an external
insect like skeleton) and Siliborgs (silicon-
based FOL).
According to Wildman, some of these new
FOL already exist in a technical sense, since 12%
of the current USA population could be consid-
ered incipient "cyborgs" that use electronic pace-
makers, artificial joints, drug implant systems,
implanted corneal lenses, artificial skin, etc. All
the previous FOL are our creations and will be
populating our world and remaking us genetical-
ly and mechanically and thereby changing our
consciousness forever.
Wildman also briefly described other four 67
 Journal of Futures Studies
non terrestrial FOL. They are Macrorgs (macro-
cosmic FOL), MVorgs (Micro Vita - microscopic
FOL), ETorgs (Extra-Terrestrial FOL), and Psyorgs
(psychic FOL). Obviously, these exotic FOL
depend very much on what definition of life is
being used; but several unknown or not yet cre-
ated intelligent and conscious entities will defi-
nitely pass the test of being "alive," and will satis-
fy most criteria under several concepts of "life."
Other authors have written about even
more life forms in a possible posthuman future,
from the very physical to the very ethereal. A
simple classification between carbon-based and
silicon-based organisms seems like a good place
where to start. Such concise system allows to
incorporate not just humans but also several
types of robots, cyborgs and symborgs (includ-
ing different logical entities, both physical and
non physical).
Into the Future
US futurists Jerome Glenn and Theodore
Gordon review possible scenarios for humanity
in the year 3000 in the "State of the Future 2000"
published by the Millennium Project (of the
American Council for the United Nations
University). They reviewed six scenarios with the
following names:
1. Still Alive at 3000.
2. End of Humanity and the Rise of the
Phoenix.
3. It's About Time.
4. The Great Divides.
5. The Rise and Fall of the Robot Empire.
6. ETI Disappoints After Nine Centuries.
These fascinating scenarios include fright-
ening possibilities like the collapse of the human
civilization to intriguing comments about the
expansion of different forms of intelligent life to
the rest of the universe. The scenarios were
developed through a two-round questionnaire
sent to a special panel selected by the
Millennium Project nodes and the Foundation
for the Future (FFF). Several factors were consid-
ered (from, for example, a global ethical system
to the ability to destroy humanity) and their tra-
jectory over the next 100, 500 and 1000 years,
68 with special attention to "unexpected" conse-
quences.
The FFF is also doing some important work
on the future evolution of humankind through
its seminars Humanity 3000 and the preparation
of its television series "The Next Thousand
Years," which is expected to be broadcasted in
2006 with biannual program updates thereafter.
While the opportunities and possibilities
for the future are mind boggling, the risks and
threats to life itself are also very real. World
renowned scientists like Albert Einstein and
Robert Oppenheimer were once deeply con-
cerned about the perils of a nuclear holocaust,
which we have managed to escape from so far.
Those were the days of the Cold War, but many
of those concerns are reappearing now with the
rise of global crime and terrorism.
There is always the possibility of a complete
collapse due to global warming, a new Ice Age,
an Asteroid collision or major Gamma Ray
bursts, among many real threats to civilization.
Several science fiction works and the scientific
literature and also cite other existential threats
to humankind, like the development of a non-
friendly artificial intelligence or the "gray goo"
effect caused by nanobots spreading out without
any control. All these challenges have to be seri-
ously considered by both current and future sen-
tient life forms in order to survive and thrive. In
fact, UK scientist Stephen Hawking has warned
that we need to consider moving to space if we
want to avoid the extinction of human knowl-
edge.
New technologies certainly bring new risks.
On the one hand, US scientist Bill Joy wrote a
controversial article "Why The Future Doesn't
Need Us," where he worries about robotics,
genetic engineering and nanotechnology. His
answer is to relinquish and stop the develop-
ment of these new technologies. On the other
hand, US engineer K. Eric Drexel, usually called
the "father" of nanotechnology, argues just the
opposite: in order to avoid the problems of
emerging technologies, we have to do more
research and understand them better.
The debate is open, but one thing is cer-
tain: humanity has always advanced thanks to
science and technology. In fact, what makes
humans different from other animals is the
 Future Life Forms among Posthumans
development of different technologies. This has
been true since the very early prehistoric times
when fire, the wheel, agriculture and primitive
writing first appeared on the face of our planet.
Moral Implications
While humanity will undoubtedly express
itself in a number of different incarnations, it will
subsequently give birth to an entirely new form
of life: Artificial intelligence. The future will be
populated by several different forms of intelli-
gent life, and humanity is already attempting to
reconcile the implications, particularly those in
the moral realm.
The word "robot" was created in 1921 by
the Czech playwright Karel Capek in his book
R.U.R.: Rossum's Universal Robots. It was immor-
talized in 1950 by Russian-American scientist
and writer Isaac Asimov in his book I, Robot
where he created the Three Laws of Robotics:
1. A robot may not injure a human being,
or, through inaction, allow a human being to
come to harm.
2. A robot must obey orders given it by
human beings except where such orders would
conflict with the First Law.
3. A robot must protect its own existence
as long as such protection does not conflict with
the First or Second Law.
Asimov eventually improved his system and
extrapolated the Zeroth Law: A robot may not
injure humanity or, through inaction, allow
humanity to come to harm. He also modified the
other Three Laws accordingly.
On a separate front, US futurist Phil McNally
and Pakistani-born futurist Sohail Inayatullah
wrote The Rights of Robots in 1987, and US femi-
nist Donna Haraway published A Cyborg
Manifesto in 1991. Both are important docu-
ments that defend robots and cyborgs on their
own right. These concepts imply a continuum
based on previous ideas concerning animal and
human rights.
US robotics expert Hans Moravec wrote
two books about robots and our/their future:
Mind Children in 1988 and Robot in 1998.
Moravec argues that robots will be our rightful
descendants and he explains several ways to
"upload" a mind into a robot. Similarly, US scien-
tist Marvin Minsky, one of the fathers of artificial
intelligence at MIT, wrote his very famous 1994
article "Will robots inherit the Earth?" in Scientific
American, where he concludes: "Yes, but they
will be our children. We owe our minds to the
deaths and lives of all the creatures that were
ever engaged in the struggle called Evolution.
Our job is to see that all this work shall not end
up in meaningless waste."
More recently, UK cybernetics professor
Kevin Warwick has been implanting his own
body with several microchip devices and pub-
lished in 2003 a book titled I, Cyborg explaining
his experiments. Warwick is a cybernetics pio-
neer who claims that "I was born human. But this
was an accident of fate - a condition merely of
time and place. I believe it's something we have
the power to change... The future is out there; I
am eager to see what it holds. I want to do
something with my life: I want to be a cyborg."
As these authors and thinkers suggest, we
need to start preparing ourselves for the coming
robot and artificial intelligence realities. To ease
the transition into a posthuman condition, we
must ready ourselves for the distinct possibility
that Earth will be inherited by not one, but sever-
al forms of highly intelligent and sentient life
forms.
The Human Seed
The human body is a good beginning, but
we can certainly improve it, upgrade it, and tran-
scend it. Biological evolution through natural
selection might be ending, but technological
evolution is only accelerating now. Technology,
which started to exhibit some dominance over
biological processes for the first time some
100.000 years ago, is finally overtaking biology
as the science of life.
As US fuzzy logic theorist Bart Kosko has
said: "biology is not destiny. It was never more
than tendency. It was just nature's first quick and
dirty way to compute with meat. Chips are des-
tiny." And photo-qubits might come soon after
standard silicon-based chips, but even that is
only an intermediate means for eternal intelli-
gent life in the universe. 69
 Journal of Futures Studies
Humans are the first species which is con-
scious of its own evolution and limitations, and
humans will eventually transcend these con-
straints to become posthumans. It might be a
rapid process like caterpillars becoming butter-
flies, as opposed to the slow evolutionary pas-
sage from apes to humans. Future intelligent life
forms might not even resemble human beings at
all, and carbon-based organisms will mix with a
plethora of other organisms. These posthumans
will depend not only on carbon-based systems
but also on silicon and other "platforms" which
might be more convenient for different environ-
ments, like outer space.
Eventually, all these new sentient life forms
might be connected to become a global brain, a
large interplanetary brain and even a larger inter-
galactic brain. The ultimate scientific, religious
and philosophical queries will continue to be
tackled by these posthuman life forms.
Intelligence will keep on evolving and will try to
answer the old-age questions of life, the universe
and everything.
In order become permanent rational "demi-
urgi" of the known universe of space and time, it
is vital to be aware that even more important
than to create is not to destroy. With ethics and
wisdom, humans will become posthumans, as
US science fiction writer David Zindell suggest-
ed:
"What is a human being, then?"
"A seed."
"A ... seed?"
"An acorn that is unafraid to destroy itself in
growing into a tree."
Correspondence
(www.cordeiro.org) is president of the World
Future Society Venezuela (www.Futuro
Venezuela.org), co-founder of the Venezuelan
Transhumanist Association (www.Trans
HumanismO.org), director of the Millennium
Project (Venezuela Node) and the Club of Rome
(Venezuela Chapter). jose@cordeiro.org
References
70 Asimov, Isaac. [1950] 1994. I, Robot. New York:
Bantam Books.
British Telecom. 2002. Technology Timeline.
London: British Telecom. www.btexact.
com/white_papers/downloads/WP106.pdf
Capek, Karel. [1921] 2001. R.U.R. New York:
Dover.
Clarke, Arthur C. 1984 (revised). Profiles of the
Future: An Inquiry into the Limits of the
Possible. New York: Henry Holt and
Company.
Cordeiro, Jose Luis. 1998. Benesuela vs. Venezuela:
El Combate Educativo del Siglo. Caracas:
Cedice. www.cordeiro.org
Drexler, K. Eric. 1987. Engines of Creation. New
York: Anchor Books. www.foresight.
org/EOC
Foundation for the Future. 2002. The Next
Thousand Years. Bellevue, Washington:
Foundation for the Future. www.future-
foundation.org/documents/nty_projde-
sc.pdf
Glenn, Jerome and Gordon, Theodore. 2000.
State of the Future 2000: At the
Millennium. Washington: Millennium
Project. www.StateOfTheFuture.org
Haraway, Donna. 1991. "A Cyborg Manifesto" in
Simians, Cyborgs and Women: The
Reinvention of Nature. New York;
Routledge. http://www.stanford.edu/
dept/HPS/Haraway/CyborgManifesto.html
Hawking, Stephen. 2002. The Theory of
Everything: The Origin and Fate of the
Universe. New York: New Millennium
Press.
Inayatullah, Sohail. 2000."Science, Civilization
and Global Ethics: Can We Understand
the Next 1000 Years?" Journal of Futures
Studies. Volume 5, Number 2, November
2000. Taipei, Taiwan: Tamkang University.
Joy, Bill. 2000. "Why The Future Doesn't Need
Us." Wired. April 2000. www.wired.com/
wired/archive/8.04/joy.html
Kurian, George T. and Molitor, Graham T.T.
1996. Encyclopedia of the Future. New
York: Macmillan.
Kurzweil, Raymond. 1999. The Age of Spiritual
Machines. New York: Penguin Books.
www.kurzweilai.net
Malaska, Pentti. 1997. Inventing Futures. Opening
Address: WFSF XV World Conference.
Brisbane, Australia: World Futures Studies
Federation.
McNally, Phil and Inayatullah, Sohail. 1988.
"Rights of Robots." Futures, 20(2), pp. 119-
 Future Life Forms among Posthumans

136. http://www.metafuture.org/Articles/
TheRightsofRobots.htm
Minsky, Marvin. 1994. "Will robots inherit the
Earth?" Scientific American, October 1994:
www.ai.mit.edu/people/minsky/
papers/sciam.inherit.txt
____. 1987. The Society of Mind. New York:
Simon and Schuster.
Moravec, Hans. 1998. Robot: Mere Machine to
Transcendent Mind. Oxford: Oxford
University Press. www.frc.ri.cmu.edu/
~hpm/book97
____. 1988. Mind Children. Boston: Harvard
University Press.
Pearson, Ian. 1998. Atlas of the Future. New York:
Macmillan.
Paul, Gregory S. and Cox, Earl. 1996. Beyond
Humanity: Cyberevolution and Future
Minds. Hingham, Massachusetts: Charles
River Media.
Regis, Edward. 1991. Great Mambo Chicken and
the Transhuman Condition: Science Slightly
over the Edge. New York: Perseus
Publishing.
Toffler, Alvin and Heidi. 1995. Creating a New
Civilization: The Politics of the Third Wave.
Atlanta: Turner Publishing Inc.
Warwick, Kevin. 2003. I, Cyborg. London:
Garnder's.
Wells, H.G. 1902. "The Discovery of the Future."
Nature, 65: www.geocities.com/yokel-
craig/hgwells1.html
Wildman, Paul. Life Futures: an initial taxonomy of
Terrestrial and Non Terrestrial Forms of
Life. Brisbane, Australia: Metafuture.
www.metafuture.org/articlesbycol-
leagues.htm
World Transhumanist Association. 2002. The
Transhumanist Declaration. New York:
World Transhumanist Association.
www.transhumanism.org/declaration.htm
Zindell, David. 1994. The Broken God. New York:
Acacia Press.

71
 Journal of Futures Studies

72